I remember clearly because I've attended them all. Having witnessed our alleged international competitiveness - particularly down under on numerous occasions - let's just say my perspective on our competitiveness isn't quite as rosy as others might enthusiastically claim.

In terms of the possible number of competitive teams you have to take account of how the sources of players has changed over the years.

Some years ago we lost RU as a source of players since that sport went pro (every side would have had at least a couple of RU internationals or similar). SL then went overseas crazy, with rules allowing them to have ridiculous numbers of overseas players.

Now junior development is the only way to go for all clubs, as the number (and quality) of overseas signings is falling due to changes to the rules but moreso simple economics making SL less attractive.

Replacing ready-made overseas players with juniors was always going to take time. If it was easy to find and develop juniors then nobody would have bothered with Aussies - but its obviously far harder in England with fewer juniors and poor structures across the sport. It should surprise nobody that quality may dip for a while until production lines are fully mature.

IMO the issue shouldn't be whether 14 teams is sustainable today, but how many teams could be sustained once all clubs have fully mature development systems in place. That may be 14, 12 or 10 teams, but it would be ridiculous to look at the bottom couple of clubs today to make a decision about the potential strength of SL long-term.

It's Catch 22.

Having 14 teams means more British juniors getting an opportunity at SL level than would be the case with 10 or 12. In the short term however, it does spread the talent pool thinly and result in teams looking for short term overseas solutions.

I think a more reasonable comparison would be 1982 to 1995 (14 years vs 15) a total of 22 games, still only won 5, scoring 252 conceding 514 at an average score of 10-21

I probably wouldn't. I was trying to be as generous as I could to the claim that "attendances are on the decline."

Not actually sure that does stand out to me.

unfortunately we're too late to try and introduce as an Olympic sport (nines), something like that would have helped generate publicity, I'm sure union will get the gig before league in the long-term

I'm quite aware of that period between 1978 and 1988 when we lost 15 tests in succession. The comparison I made was entirely deliberate - it was to highlight that we were getting things right 'internationally' in the period (1988-1994) immediately prior to Super League.

The respective English and Australian domestic seasons were not aligned which meant that many of our players had the opportunity for off-season spells in the Australian competition and vice versa which raised our playing standards and our international competitiveness. Think back to the GB players circa 1988-1994 and how many had guest spells at Australian clubs along with all those top class Australian and Kiwi players guesting at clubs in the UK.

We lost all this with the Super League switch to summer along with proper international tours and we've been going backwards internationally ever since. Domestically, we no longer attract the top overseas players in their prime - due in the main to the aligned seasons - and clubs today scrape the barrel signing what dregs might be available.

Whilst I agree to a certain extent, I think you could put the demise down to pre-SL when clubs had masses of Aussies/ Kiwis playing for them. in the late 80's early 90's with 10 /11 or more overseas players in some teams. Even when overseas players were restricted the clubs used loopholes such as grand-parent or Kolpak to pack their teams with overseas players.

Even during those "halcyon" days the GB squad had plenty of poor players.

There were a few desperate clubs who packed their sides with overseas players - Leeds and Halifax spring to mind during the mid-80's. I don't recall other teams going quite as far as those two clubs did. SL was supposed to be the dawn of a new era - full-time professional players and all the benefits to accrue from that. All it ushered in was the destruction of the international tour calendar due to summer rugby, a lack of opportunities for our players to mix it regularly against top class opposition players from down under and a reliance upon packing SL squads with average overseas players instead. Super League screwed things up IMO and we've been sold an inferior product.


You're entitled to that opinion but it's not one which I share. However poor some of those players were in your opinion back then, they performed better and more consistently against top class opposition in the test arena compared to today's 'out of their depth' SL bred players. I'd suggest that was due to being exposed to a lot more regular games against top class players on proper international tours and in the domestic competitions at home and in Australia. That's enough of a reason to return to a winter season IMO. I've never been sold on this summer rugby bollox anyhow.

Plenty of people have been sold on summer rugby, there is a huge amount more people watching the game now than there was in the years prior to the switch, people didn’t like standing in the cold watching a slower game, played in a mud bath.

As I put before, a tour would be fairly simple and easy to fit in the calendar if the will was there. Realistically we would only have to change the season by a month or so every 8 years, with the NRL doing the same, it is a lack of will rather than insurmountable obstacles which stops the game doing this.

There are any number of socio-economic reasons for the decline in RL from Thatcher's destruction of historical northern industries to the advent of professional rugby union. Even in those days the big clubs like Leeds and wigan were pushing themsevse to the brink of extinction. RL knew it was facing problems and jumped on the Sky ark to save itself from the rising waters.
Unfortunately at every hands turn the member clubs, who effectively agree any changes to SL, then try their best to undermine those rules that they agreed to in anyway they can through their own shortsightedness, from salary cap breaches to overseas player loopholes.

IMO the problems that we have come way before SL and the advent of summer rugby but the legacy that those actions left meant that SL became an inferior product. I believe that even if SL and summer rugby had not arrived RL would still be in as bad a state, if not worse.

I bet you were perusing the LS Lowry gallery humming the Hovis Bread theme tune whilst imagining cobbled streets before you wrote that nonsense. I wasn't aware that it was Super League standards which improved turf technology and quality, though even a cursory glance at Headingley's pitch during the SL era is one of potholes, lumps and copious amounts of sand... a far cry from the pre-SL days when the Headingley pitch could have staged bowling, croquet or lawn tennis and give the All England Club a run for their money 3.45703125:5